Handelt es sich bei der derzeitigen Situation in Kirgisistan um eine (vor-)revolutionäre Situation? Oder nur um einen Machtkampf zwischen verschiedenen Fraktionen der Bourgeoisie und der politischen Elite oder zwischen regionalen Machthabern nebst Anhang?
In Defence of Marxism zeigt sich (wie üblich) optimistisch, sieht aber auch die Gefahr eines Bürgerkrieges:
“The revolution in Kyrgyzstan has de facto overthrown the old hated regime and led to a new interim government being stalled. Now a stand-off is developing between the two forces. The movement that led to this situation was a revolution from below, an uprising of the most downtrodden layers of society, who organised themselves in their own elected councils. Now there will be an attempt to emasculate these councils and divert attention away from the real issues.
…
The main forms of protest were through the “kurultais” (conventions), first in Bishkek (17 March) and later on 7 April in other regions of the country where opposition leaders were planning rallies, including the leader of the Social Democratic Party, Roza Otunbaeva. To stop the “kurultais” the government ordered mass arrests of opposition activists, but the result was the opposite of what they had expected. Tens of thousands of people demanded the release of Bolot Sherniazov, the leader of the opposition Ata-Meken party in Talas. Finally he was freed when thousands of people surrounded the police headquarters.
…
However, this is not the end of the story. The struggle between the poor South and the wealthier North could develop into a civil war. Many people in the South have family links with Bakiyev and on this basis took key positions, not just in politics but also in business. They are ready to defend their wealth even with weapons. Bakiyev, holding on in the South, has offered to talk to the opposition and its new interim government. But its leader Roza Otunbayeva has not accepted the offer and has demanded that he resign.
In this situation it is important to look at the social aspect of the movement and explain that it is not between the people of the South and the North, but a class movement of the most downtrodden and poor layers of society against the wealthy elite. Through this it would be possible to prevent a fratricidal war from developing. For the poor people in both the North and the South there would be nothing to gain from such a war. What is most important is to develop and to keep the kurultais functioning. The experience of the direct election of local leaderships is an important one and these should remain in place and be used to control that the opposition leadership keeps its promises.”
Ein Beitrag auf LibCom berichtet von massiven Plünderungen (stellt sich die Frage, ob hier auch nationalistische Motive eine Rolle spielten):
“At night, according to Lenta.ru reports, the “people’s expropriation” in Bishkek became widespread: “By morning, most shops located in the heart of the city were looted…. Malls “Caravan”, “Voentorg” and “Vefa”, supermarkets networks “7 Days” and “Narodny” suffered. Some of the shops were burned. The crowd looted and burned a house belonging to the family of President Kurmanbek Bakiyev. Everything was carried from there: clothes, carpets, appliances, linens and dishes”.
According to Interfax, quoting eyewitnesses, people crushed the shopping centers owned by the Chinese and Turkish businessmen. Many shops, supermarkets and markets in central Bishkek have been dismantled without remainder. Young people began to smash gas stations “BNK”, belonging to the president’s son Maxim, set fire to the residence and the mansions of the presidential family. It is reported that luxury shops and casinos in Bishkek were burned.
Like 5 years ago, the bourgeoisie has organized its own “guard” to protect property. It attracted even veterans of the Afghan war! They were able to repulse the attack on some shops. The new authorities have allowed the troops and police to shoot “looters”. On the streets of Bishkek, acts of class war put on again.
Nevertheless, on April 8, expropriation continued. While it is difficult to say in which cases the shops were pulled down by the poor, and in which the Mafia operates, which is not averse to profit in an environment of ensuing chaos. Whatever it was, the Russian bourgeois media, gritting my teeth in hatred of the attacks on the “sanctity of private property”, must to recognize:
“The victory belongs to looters. For some time, they found themselves again in a country of free televisions and computers, foodstuffs, and carpets, furniture and office equipment. But it’s not all. Marauders proved that such a significant event such as a change of power in Kyrgyzstan, not without their participation”. “
Ein weiterer Kommentar findet sich auf der Webseite der SAV:
“Diese Ereignisse sind ein Ergebnis der aktuellen Wirtschaftskrise und der Verzweiflung der Bevölkerung über die Ergebnisse der Tulpenrevolution 2005. Nach Presseberichten hat die neue Regierung jetzt die Rücknahme der Erhöhungen der Strom- und Heizungsgebühren, die Wiederverstaatlichung der Goldminen und strategischer Industrien angekündigt. Unter diesen Bedingungen sind Massenproteste die beste Möglichkeit, sich für seine Rechte einzusetzen. Aber ohne ein sozialistisches Programm und eine Organisation, die diese Rechte auf Dauer verteidigen kann, können solche revolutionären Ereignisse zu einer weiteren „Farbrevolution“ führen, in der die revolutionäre Energie der Massen von einem anderen Teil des Kapitalistenklasse in deren eigenem Interesse ausgenutzt wird. Bereits jetzt sagt die neue Regierung in der selben Sprache, die 2005 verwendet wurde, dass das wichtigste die „Wiederherstellung der Ordnung“ sei. Die gleiche Clique wird an die Macht kommen, nur ohne Bakijew. Sie werden die Ereignisse der letzten beiden Tage nutzen um die Wut des Volkes zu demonstrieren und Dampf abzulassen.”
Révolution en Iran schliesslich sieht in dem Aufstand ein Ereignis mit Vorbildcharakter für den Iran und die ganze Region:
“Sans la moindre illusion sur le fait que les partis de l’opposition apporteront une amélioration en ce qui concerne les conditions de vie de la population et en particulier de la classe ouvrière, le soulèvement au Kirghizistan démontre que la population peut désarmer les forces de répression, s’armer et chasser les tyrans au pouvoir. Ce soulèvement montre que la population révoltée peut vaincre les forces de répression de l’appareil d’Etat. En cela, le soulèvement au Kirghizistan est un exemple non seulement pour l’Iran pour tous les pays du monde et une telle insurrection peut très bien être lancée par une organisation ouvrière quant la situation s’y prête, et même au Kirghizistan rien n’indique que le peuple, armé, laissera passivement le nouveau gouvernement continuer la même politique anti-sociale et répressive que le précédent. En Iran, où la population affronte depuis le mois de juin les forces répressives, l’exemple du Kirghizistan apporte l’espoir. Exemple, un message parmi d’autres circulant sur Twitter : « C’était au Kirghizistan, ils ont pris la station de télé d’Etat, etc… on ne peut s’empêcher de penser que ça pourrait être l’Iran. Cela peut sûrement aussi être l’Iran !”
